Thought the 1,500-page prospectus told you everything you ever wanted to know about Glencore? Think again. Of the many legal battles involving the company that we report today, only one – centred on an alleged bribery plot at the European commission – is detailed in the flotation document.

All the others, one must assume, are covered by the paragraph on litigation on page 182. Glencore, with 7,200 customers and suppliers around the world, has commercial disputes from time to time; it believes it has "meritorious defences"; it thinks the likelihood of liabilities arising is "remote"; and any liabilities would not have a "material adverse effect" on the company's financial position.

Maybe Glencore's confidence will turn out to be justified. But some of these cases don't look trivial, even if they can be deemed non-material in financial terms. There are questions of reputation. The Namibian case, for example, involves allegations of unfair pricing when dealing with the state oil company. Glencore says the government should have put in place procedures to deal with the increases.

That plays to one of the big worries about Glencore as an investment: will commodity-producing countries, now they can see the riches being accumulated by the Glencore billionaires in low-tax Switzerland, seek better trading and supply terms for themselves? Are the days of easy pickings for Glencore over? Is a backlash coming?

Clearly, disclosure of the Namibian case would not provide definitive answers. But, investors, seeking to understand the character of Glencore, might welcome more pieces in the puzzle.

They might also note that BHP Billiton, the world's biggest miner, gave details of seven legal proceedings and investigations over two pages of its last annual report. Most cases look similarly non-material – $40m here, $115m there. But BHP, worth four times as much as Glencore, still thought its shareholders deserved to know. That's the way it's done on the London market.